4

I keep running into a (quite frankly daft) conspiracy theory regarding the sinking of the Titanic. It posits that the RMS Olympic was secretly swapped in to replace the RMS Titanic and was deliberately sunk.

The motivations given tend to be either J.P. Morgan wanted to assassinate his rivals, or White Star Line were perpetrating an insurance fraud to try to recoup losses from the damage caused to the Olympic in a previous collision with HMS Hawke.

Most of these claims are easy to debunk, but one that seems to keep cropping up regards the SS Californian - a ship that was nearby the Titanic when it hit the iceberg, but, controversially, didn't respond to the distress signals in a timely manner.

The claim is that the Californian was intended to act as a rescue ship for the passengers, and was (deliberately) carrying a cargo of items that would have been useful for a rescue attempt - variously reported as lifebelts, sweaters and warm clothing.

The SS Californian's cargo manifest is said to provide evidence for this, and hence evidence that the Californian was intended as a rescue ship and that the Titanic sinking was deliberate, but I have been unable to locate it.

Was the SS Californian intended to be a rescue vehicle?

Daniel R Hicks
  • 5,550
  • 3
  • 36
  • 38
GordonM
  • 1,940
  • 1
  • 17
  • 28
  • According to the [FAQ](http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/faq#questions), Skeptics.SE is for researching the evidence behind the claims you hear or read. This question didn't quite fit our scope, and I have made some major edits so it does - please check you are comfortable with them. – Oddthinking Nov 08 '14 at 01:10
  • In particular, just asking us for the manifest isn't a claim. I've broadened the question to not "find the manifest", but "show (through any acceptable means) whether this claim is true or false" – Oddthinking Nov 08 '14 at 01:32
  • 1
    It would be improved further by explicit links and quotes from people making the claim about lifebelts/sweaters/warm clothes. – Oddthinking Nov 08 '14 at 01:33
  • Besides which I also already know the answer to the rescue vessel question, "no she wasn't" 6000GRT and a passenger capacity of 100 - crew versus 45000GRT and a compliment of 2200+. Pretty rotten choice! Besides the navigational precision needed for a mid ocean rendezvous was simply not possible with 1912 tech which basically consisted of a compass, a watch, a sextant and guessing your speed since the last fix you took (Titanic's distress position was out by miles) – GordonM Nov 08 '14 at 08:47
  • @GordonM Good call. Let's not give the loons notability by linking back to them. – Shadur Nov 08 '14 at 09:38
  • 5
    I disagree with you both about linking - but probably should be a Meta or chat issue, not comments. Our M.O. here isn't to starve bad ideas of oxygen, but shine a light on them and reveal their flaws. In the meantime, we need links to avoid arguing against strawmen, which, I would argue, is one of the most serious causes of low-quality discussions. – Oddthinking Nov 08 '14 at 11:42
  • @GordonM: If you already know the answer, and have good evidence to support it (a) why not post it as an answer, so we do have a decent response to yet another silly claim, and (b) why is the manifest of any interest? I am trying to keep this question in scope. "Where is the manifest?" doesn't appear to be. – Oddthinking Nov 08 '14 at 11:44
  • The manifest is important because they keep dragging it up as "proof" of their conspiracy theory. Being able to see what's actually on the manifest is important for being able to counter such claims. – GordonM Nov 08 '14 at 13:39
  • I've done some looking around but still can't find a definitive source for what cargo the ship was carrying on the night the Titanic sank. All I could find was a brief mention of her carrying a "mixed cargo" on Encyclopedia Titanica, and some oblique references to cotton on Reddit. Obviously these are far from useful or reliable, but they seem to imply that there's an actual cargo manifest out there somewhere. Neither Titanica or the Reddit user cited it though, so I've so far not been able to find it. – GordonM May 21 '16 at 10:02
  • I don't have sufficient privilege to edit, but it should be *iceberg.* – phoog Jan 31 '20 at 08:19
  • There are multiple books devoted to addressing this: Bruce Beveridge and Steve Hall (2004), *Olympic & Titanic: The Truth Behind the Conspiracy*, Mark Chirnside (2006), "Olympic & Titanic – An Analysis of the Robin Gardiner Conspiracy Theory", Gareth Russell (2019) *The Ship of Dreams: The Sinking of the Titanic and the End of the Edwardian Era*. It's a lot of data to deal with... if anyone wants this answered, offer a bounty – Avery Feb 04 '20 at 21:48

1 Answers1

-7

2018 Article from Unredacted

They were carrying 3000 woolen blankets and jumpers, and they stopped at the wrong destination overshooting the area by 13 miles. Their radio was off and instead of turning it back on the captain decided to stick with a morse lamp. Hopefully you'll find this link as interesting as I did but it's very similar to what your talking about

tripleee
  • 127
  • 1
  • 7
Kassy Conard
  • 9
  • 10
    [Welcome to Skeptics!](http://meta.skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/1505/welcome-to-new-users).At the moment, this isn't much more than a restatement of the conspiracy theory. Please explain why we should trust this source. – Oddthinking Jan 30 '20 at 07:44
  • 2
    In 1912 13 miles was par for the course when it came to navigational errors. This is why the whole idea of a mid ocean rendezvous is so far fetched. With GPS and radar it'd be a tricky manoeuvrer, with nothing but the stars and dead reckoning it'd be all but impossible. – GordonM Jan 30 '20 at 15:11
  • 2
    Besides the question I asked was for a copy of the alleged manifest. This does not answer that question – GordonM Jan 30 '20 at 15:17
  • Please note that this website expects *reliable* sources to back up claims. The link you provided does not appear very trustworthy. It does not cite a single source for their statements (except a book which seems of equally dubious quality) and the photos they posted might be taken out of context. – Philipp Jan 31 '20 at 16:35